Advocate TB Mini, a lawyer who represented the survivor in the 2017 actress assault case, has approached the Advocate General of Kerala seeking sanction to initiate criminal contempt of court proceedings against Ernakulam Principal Sessions Court judge Honey M Varghese.
Advocate TB Mini had assisted the public prosecutor in the case and also represented the survivor in connected matters before the High Court, including cases concerning the illegal access of the memory card containing visuals of the assault.
Judge Varghese, who delivered the verdict in the actress assault case, was recently transferred to Alappuzha District Court as part of a routine judicial transfer.
Advocate TB Mini has claimed that during the trial in the actress assault case, Judge Varghese made defamatory statements in court, falsely portraying the lawyer as negligent, triggering widespread online abuse against her.
The controversy is tied to a petition filed on behalf of the survivor actress by advocate Mini, which was taken up for hearing on January 12, 2026, by the sessions judge.
Mini, who was engaged in another case, could not appear. However, her junior lawyer made a representation on her behalf. During these proceedings, the judge allegedly made comments about Mini's conduct during the earlier trial in the presence of other lawyers, court staff and media personnel.
Mini alleged that the judge made defamatory comments against her in open court, stating that she attended the trial for less than 10 days, that even if she attended court, it would only be for a short time, and that she slept in the court.
These observations, Mini alleged, were made without any factual basis. She has contended that such comments amount to scandalising the court and seriously damaging her professional reputation and integrity as an advocate.
In a petition addressed to the Advocate General of Kerala, Mini asserted that she had attended the trial proceedings for more than 200 days, including for the examination of witnesses and for arguments and that as the survivor's counsel, she could only assist the prosecution as per the law.
The petition further claimed that the judge's remarks were immediately reported and widely circulated by television channels, newspapers, and online platforms, resulting in abusive comments and harassment directed at her.
According to Mini, the public was led to believe that she had failed in her professional duties and was responsible for the acquittal of certain accused in the case.
She added that the comments made by the judge have caused lasting damage to her credibility among clients and colleagues and even led her to be subjected to personal attacks on social media.
Mini had earlier submitted a complaint to the Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court seeking contempt action against Judge Varghese over the alleged remarks.
Since no action was taken on this complaint, Mini has now approached the Advocate General, invoking Sections 15(1)(a) and 16 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, seeking permission to initiate criminal contempt proceedings against Judge Varghese before the Kerala High Court.
She has contended in her petition that when a judicial officer makes derogatory statements against an advocate in open court, particularly in the presence of media, it reduces public confidence in the justice system.
She has also sought the expunction of the statements made by the judge from court records.
The trial in the actress assault case concluded with the conviction of prime accused Pulsar Suni and five others for the offence of gang-rape, outraging the modesty of a woman, criminal conspiracy and kidnapping. Actor Dileep, who was earlier accused of masterminding the crime, was acquitted of all charges.